This stubborn untruth is crucial because the far-right's ongoing obsession[2] with Obama's former pastor[3] only makes sense if conservatives can argue it's a new story and that new information is coming out all the time. They need to whitewash the past[4] because Obama foes have to pretend voters were never informed about Obama's association with Wright and his incendiary rhetoric; that the press hid the truth about Obama.

In other words, there needs to be a conspiracy. Or, Obama was never vetted[5]!

For the record, the Times "ignored" the Wright story so often in 2008 that it managed to publish just 200-plus articles and columns that mentioned both Obama and Rev. Wright, according to Nexis. The Times published more than 126 rticles and columns that mentioned Obama and Wright at least three times each, and 33 hefty pieces that mentioned both men at least eight times each.

As we've noted before, the avalanche of non-stop Wright coverage became so intense in 2008 that at one point the press was covering it more closely[6] that Hillary Clinton's campaign, and she was running for president at the time. Also, just five percent[7] of Americans thought the story received "too little" media attention, according to a CBS/New York Times poll in 2008.

Maybe Breitbart editors just have a different definition of "ignored."